According to the Daily Caller, President Obama became the first siting commander in chief to directly address Planned Parenthood. He proudly bragged that the number one abortion provider is not going anywhere. He concluded his remarks with the remarkable, “God Bless You Planned Parenthood.” Tiny Tim was not available for comment.

Shrewdly, he gave the speech on a Friday, allowing the Saturday lull in the news cycle to bury his highly offensive remarks. If however next week, people are still disturbed by his asking the Almighty to bestow grace upon those who advocate the death of the most innocent for power and money in all circumstances, I’m sure Jay Carney will come to the podium to assure us that someone just sneezed and the president ad-libbed what any normal person would do when someone involuntarily expels unwanted blobs of cells.

We have come to the point that atrocities of the greatest magnitude no longer hold our interest as a nation. Or at least, the media has decided, they shouldn’t. Any attempt by Mark Steyn or others to rouse the imagination of the American public with the gruesome reality of abortion as brought to its logical conclusion via performance abortion artist Dr. Kermit Gosnell is met with a collective yawn. The moral compass of the country continues to mutter in its sleep, the unintentionally ironic slogan of the age, “COEXIST.” At best, we get people to declare the atrocities of the clinic in the city of brotherly love are an outlier, a deviation from the mean, the mode and median of the business of abortion.

However, the response of those who advocate pro-choice positions does not indicate that this doctor’s practices are the standard deviation from the sample, their silence speaks volumes to the reality of abortion, the clinics, the persons who perform these procedures and the aftermath of those “choices.” If this were unexpected or unusual, they’d be screaming disassociation, demanding that abortionist providers speak out to declare that you cannot judge us by the behavior of a single person who performed badly. They are not lining up to do this, they are running for the hills, hoping we will be distracted as we easily are, by anything and everything, so that things may go on as normal, meaning clinics like this go on doing what they do and everyone shuts their eyes to the trains that flow by on time every day. Dr. Gosnell is not the Westboro Baptist Church of abortion, he is the poster child of its practices.

We can tell ourselves this isn’t happening. It doesn’t make it so. We can say that the deaths of 55 million nation wide over 40 years has no effect on the people of our nation, but it doesn’t make it true. We can lie all day to ourselves even when there are feet in jars in front of us, it doesn’t mean we aren’t becoming blind to all that is good, true and beautiful, it doesn’t mean we aren’t becoming like Gollum, forgetting the taste of bread, the softness of the wind, the smell of grass, even our own names, and we will weep, precious, we will weep to be so alone.

Final note: For some reason, struggling with Google to find the full text of his speech, here are the low lights…but you get the point. There is no law but our law and abortion is its name.

Facebook is awash with equal signs to denote one’s stance on same-sex marriage, but what if marriage is an absolute value?

The argument before the court is one of equal treatment of all citizens by the law. What is permitted one person, should be permitted another, with homosexuality being defined as an inherent trait and thus one that must be not discriminated against. To not allow people to marry if they are of the same gender is to be unjust, unfair, the law is not equal. Those in favor of the court overturning DOMA, view the issue of marriage as points on a graph, (X,X) (X,Y) (Y,Y), nothing more.

People of religious background, who see marriage as not merely a civil union sanctioned by the state, resist this redefinition of marriage as a merely adult contract that involves sex, with only the variety of erotic expression being the difference. The arguments that cite the 10 commandments and Jesus pointing out that whosoever looks at a woman with lust commits adultery and Saint Paul’s description of how men and women gave themselves over to appetites may sway those who take their faith seriously, but they will hold no weight in the legal system, nor in the hearts of those who disavow the existence of God in the first place, or whose understanding of God is a God whose standards for behavior only reflect their own. They view the issue as having the additional component of children, and family, and God, or namely, all the points extending outward to eternity from the beginning of a point that is both horizontal, vertical and transcends the mere two dimensions rendered by male and female. (X,Y) times infinity.

The law of the land however, may already be a lost landscape. I suspect it is so.

The argument of 2000 years of history also bear no weight against the evolved modern thinking. Nothing thought before was or is as important as what is felt now.

So the argument against same-sex marriage licences must be made using logic and appealing to the process of law. Not very emotionally compelling methods of argument, but sound.

First, to the issue of equality. Sometimes fair is not equal. Sometimes equal is not fair. If a school opts to ensure that the outcomes for all students is equal and gives everyone B-‘s on their report cards, it is unfair to those who would have scored better, it undervalues those who worked to earn a B-, and it is unjust in that it denies a true education and its value to those who receive the grade without having done the necessary work to justify their marks. But it is equal, and in that sense, perfectly fair. The described example is pure logic applied to an outcome with the desire being equality and fairness, and we can all see, it is neither fair nor equal, nor just.

If we want fairness of outcomes, and those who are seeking same-sex marriages want property rights, association connections –to be able to sign on to each other’s insurance/inheritance law, tax shelter deductions to apply, right of attorney/survivorship kind of things, and these kind of things can be done if the states so chose, if the government itself chooses, if the individual chooses, across all 50 states via other methods without eliminating the distinction which is sacred to some people, would that be considered fair by those who want this? I suspect not. It is not the benefits but the recognition that is desired, ergo nothing but recognition shall satisfy.

Is the demand sufficient reason to deny the existing clamor for the throwing out of DOMA?

Let me ask this question. Do we want the court as a precedent, to have the power to throw out based on popular opinion, the laws of a given state as voted on and determined by the people of said state? I know it was done with abortion, and we are still slugging it out 40 years later.

If a law fairly enacted via election considered legal and within the confines of existing Federal can be destroyed because of a mere change in the election cycle, we should do away with states all together, as their regulations and rules and laws only exist at the pleasure of the federal government. Eliminate state government and the hassle of an extra level of bureaucracy. If we’re going to be ruled top down, best to cut out the middle man fiefdoms. But the question stands, for that is what the Supreme Court must rule if it rules to throw out the law passed in California. Citizenry are to be ruled by their betters, except when their betters agree with the citizenry. If you agree with your betters in this stance, you have no beef, you’ld best always agree though.

Do we want the government to determine if a religion should be allowed to practice its faith, to teach its faith, to live out its faith, in hiring/curriculum/ or will that be now considered a violation of civil rights? Does anyone not think there will be deliberate test cases put forth to ensure that no one anywhere, in the Catholic Church, in any institution, has the right to say anything other than same-sex marriage, viva la difference? We need to think as judges, not advocates, to discern what is proper and why. What are the ramifications for society at large –to which those who favor licenses for all say, none but goodness, if this law comes to pass? First, let me clarify, I do not expect apocalypse but I do have worries about the erosion of the value of the vote, and the rule of law.

I will lay out my concerns. I know there are states where this has passed, and we have lost the adoption service by Catholic Charities in those states as a result. That is one consequence. It is a real one. If people of good faith, acting in good faith, cannot follow their faith and be in compliance with U.S. law, there is a break down in the balance of liberties secured by our constitution. If people of good character, who disagree, cannot live out that disagreement without harassment by others for simply disagreeing, again, we are slipping into a society where emotional trump cards rule over personal judgment.

I know there are already law suits when people of faith, out of a sense of their fidelity to God, are sued for refusing to witness or provide services to same sex couples. How long before people who profess to be of a faith that teaches against such unions, are shunned as a matter of course and disallowed from certain professions if they would live out their faith? What happens to Christians or Catholics or Amish or Muslims who run bed and breakfasts, photography shops, dress shops and bakeries? Will they be allowed to exist without becoming politicized or destroyed for not going along with popular culture and current trends? Lest you think I am being over the top, people have already driven a woman from her job at a University for daring to sign a petition in defense of traditional marriage. There have already been suits against people who tried to refuse services on religious grounds. Those objecting have lost, those who objected were subject to the court of public opinion. I cannot think those who dare to oppose same sex marriage on religious grounds will not be subject to worse consequences than being “outed” by an activist newspaper since the precedent in court has already been created. Lest anyone think I am engaging in hyperbole or overreaction with my concerns, we need only look north to our neighbors in Canada or to the original country Denmark who began us down this road to see the end outcome. http://faithinourfamilies.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/hundreds-of-christians-prosecuted-over-same-sex-marriage-law/

What assurances are there to Churches that the US will not follow in Denmark’s recent (2013) footsteps and demand Churches officiate such ceremonies even if the creed of said church demands otherwise? There are none.

No one will answer. There is a collective, “Pshaw.”

What about the push for further redefinition, from marriage between two adults who consent to more? Again, the collective response from those who favor same-sex marriage is “Pshaw, that slippery slope argument isn’t of sufficient weight to forego pushing forward with what we want.”

In other words, “So what?” Which means, it will happen. And when it does, all anyone who opposed same-sex marriage on the slippery slopes argument against further redefinition, will be proven right, but again, the result will be a societal shrugging of the shoulders, “So what?” 50 years ago, Humane Vitae predicted we would see these days.

Part of our problem is the contraceptive culture. We live in an age that does not view the erotic as sacred, and thus marriage is not sacred. Ergo protecting marriage does not make sense in the modern world to those who think it needs no protection. Part of the problem is the emotional land mined sphere in which we must conduct our discussion. When those who oppose same-sex marriage speak, we are presumed to be acting either out of ignorance (Christians are simplistic stupid fools who follow a space spaghetti monster Santa Claus god), or malice. (We’re haters and bigots and homophobes). As such, opposition via the hardball tactics of smearing is dimmed/silenced. Who wants to invite that sort of pain into one’s life?

One might argue then, we must not hold our convictions dear if we would be silent in the face of mere ridicule or opposition, and that would be partially unfair. It takes courage to speak out when a subject is unpopular. There are consequences to speaking out. Given that this is Holy week, the Peter moment of being at the fire when the servant girl says, “Surely, you were with this man Jesus.” comes to mind. He stayed but was fearful to speak up, because he was not ready to walk the path to the cross yet.

While you might ask, why this piece has returned to religion, it is because it is the whole reason anyone would willingly oppose same-sex marriage. We hold marriage to be not merely a civil act, but a sacred act, and we do not want the states to equate the two anymore than we want heterosexual people living together to be equated with being married. So when we argue against changing the meaning of marriage, and those in favor of striking down DOMA, it is little wonder we do not see eye to eye or understand each other’s position, we are talking about apples and oranges.

Fortunately, we can only see into the glass darkly, so we do not know how grace works in all things, even the wisest cannot see all ends, and there is always hope. Even the smallest act can have great consequences in all our souls. So I urge all, not to fall into despair (the sin which ultimately damned Judas), it is not ours to win, only to witness.

If you saw the recent repulsive ad that Lena Dunham. I’m calling it 50 shades of Primae Noctis for comparing voting to losing one’s virginity. It’s a cry for help that makes Ms. Fluke look classy.

Recently, Mitt received a primo endorsement from Meatloaf. For conservatives and especially women, the reality of this election is a stark contrast. What we have, and what are our options? We know what we’ve had the past 4 years has been at best dysfunctional. It’s time to see other people. The courting of the GOP gave us Romney. We’re voting. We’re voting for Romney. We’re not in love, but we’re gonna do it.

The result might be best summed up by one of his most famous tunes.
Cue, “I want you…I want you..I need you..I need you…but there ain’t no way I’m ever gonna love you.. now don’t be sad. Don’t be sad……….’cause two out of three ain’t bad.

At first, I wasn’t going to address this issue, be gracious in victory and all that, but now that the apologists, toadies, flunkies and sycophants have begun declaring there were multiple mysterious forces at work to deprive the President of his victory, I’m mad.

One day after the debate thumping, the president was out in Virginia declaring that a “different Mitt Romney” was at the debates.

Today, there are conspiracy theories about altitude sickness and secret tissue cheat sheets, the need for the President to appear non threatening and code words for racism when Romney called out the President for repeating claims that were untrue.

So as I understand it, the reason the President lost isn’t the facts (his record), isn’t he looked tired, isn’t he didn’t respond to questions and grew combative even with the moderator, but that Romney has an evil twin who sports a magic handkerchief.

Seriously? Theoretically, satire of the existing administration was supposed to be hard. So what really caused the reality of the debate night? Potluck has uncovered possible theories.

So, The Goracle`s explanation of 5,000′ altitude is too high for Obama`s brain to work properly without sufficient time to adjust didn`t seem plausible (or implausible) enough to make the list ? It sounded to me to fit right in there with the rest of Dr Climate Change`s loony notions. Oh, and on the subject of AlBore, the hypocrite, although he “sounds” all in for green energy alternatives, he has not one red cent invested in green tech.; according to the SEC. Fascinating; carbon credits for thee, but not for me !

Zero exhibited the classic example of cowardice after being soundly trounced by going out on Wednesday and repeating the same “$5 Trillion tax cut” lie and talking tuff. Very childish and insulting to everyone who saw the debate. He obviously thinks he`s fooling people and for some, he`s right. SAD !

It has been suggested that Barry lost / performed poorly because of his drug use – Current and continuing drug use !

10) If it was outrageous and irresponsible of Reagan and Bush to increase deficit spending, why no noise whatsoever at the current administration?

9) Drone strikes and Kill lists…any qualms whatsoever?

8) What should be the limit of government power?

7) Now that Gitmo hasn’t been closed, unemployment hasn’t gone down below 8% and we have a triple the size deficit, what do you think the President will do in a second term that warrants your vote? Why would he have to since once he’s in power and has no future election prospects, he is beholden to no one?

5) Do you think owing 16 trillion and having no passed written and signed budget for 3 1/2 years is a coincidence?

4) How is it charity to take money forcibly not to give to the poor but to give to the government to use without oversight?

3) Fast and Furious…either everyone else is lying including those dead people in Mexico and our country, or the administration is, if Eric Holder is innocent then he is incompetent, if he’s not innocent, he’s immoral. Your thoughts?

2) Lybian Embassy…we knew…He snoozed. 4 Americans murdered. We knew. He knew. And yet we focus on a film that no one saw and no one cared about, not even the people doing the rioting. How many have to die before someone will admit to grave error and responsibility?

All good questions here and typical scrambling of facts and fiction at their site.

I remember the left bashing Bush over the death toll in Iraq and “celebrating” when the toll hit 1,000. I read recently that over 70% of the deaths in Afghanistan have occurred on Obama`s watch with the toll hitting 2,000 there today with two more killed by Afghan Trainees.

I do not remember them celebrating as much as firmly pointing out that this was an unacceptable loss of American life for a war with which they disagreed. But seeing as Afghanistan was a “good war” the cost of military personnel is not something the press in general feels a need to bring up.

I used the quotation marks to signify that the left used the milestone as a way to further hammer Bush on the wrongness of the Irag War and how he had gotten so many of our guys killed, even if the left doesn`t really care one whit about our military. That 1,000 mark was for both wars combined, if I`m not mistaken.

ugh that link. Besides the “abortion not mentioned hellooo MURDER” point, also that was some nice misinterpretation of the Constitution re the “general welfare.” And just a bunch of smug self-satisfaction at being so morally superior. Cheers!

I asked my older sister question #10 during Obama’s first year in office. She is a self described, “big lib.” She said his insane spending was okay because finally someone was spending money on things that needed to be done.
When I pressed her and told her the facts, like less than 10% was going to go to infrastructure spending and “shovel ready jobs” (it ended up being a scant 6%), and that a vast amount of the stimulus was going to corporations that were run by big Obama contributors she got upset and from then on refused to talk politics with me.
So of course, being the good little brother that I am, I bring up politics whenever I see her.
Even when it is my sister, I love driving libs crazy.

The other day a friend of mine was getting really down about politics. I understood.

Neither side seems serious about reducing the debt, the deficit or even curbing the slightest of abuses of Congress. Jobs are still MIA, the housing crisis has all of the nation trapped in mortgage amber and the super increase in demand for government safety nets and use of them coupled with the increase in taxes across the board on all those who are not yet using them continues to make day to day living much more of a chore than it ought to be. We used to breathe easier.

Then, there are the unspoken problems like the systemic ethical, moral and constitutional flaws in the currently existing health care law, the erosion of liberties a ‘la Patriot Act Part Deux, the Drone Wars, the massive increase in authority and oversight of the IRS, and the lack of safety of American people abroad if the government decides to look the other way or spread a convenient untruth when some diplomat has the poor taste to be assassinated during an election year. Fast and Furious has been neatly swept under a rug never to be mentioned again. I also forgot to mention the Kill List. Before anyone says “Hey! You’re piling on Obama!” let me point out, Romney isn’t mentioning these things either so either he wants to keep them going or he’s gutless on this point and so they’ll still exist. Either way, I’m irritated. It means these things that shouldn’t be in a nation that values rule of law, the Constitution and due process, will be allowed to continue. (SSSHHHHHHHH, Not supposed to think that or criticize, just vote and be done with it).

That the polls that aren’t rah rahing for one side indicate a mostly 50-50 call indicates the reason for the near passionless political life of those on either side who normally put up signs, get out the vote and debate their neighbors.

But I told my friend, “As Catholics, we have to stay informed. As Catholics, we are compelled to be involved. As Catholics, we have to act.” In other words, we can’t just rail (wrath undirected is the equivalent of being a troll in com boxes, it’s stupid, unbecoming and doesn’t persuade hearts, change minds or affect policy –it only leaves everyone else with a sour taste in their mouth when your name pops up). We can’t despair. (That’s quitting with a whimper. It also means whoever wins doesn’t need to pay you any mind). And Further, we can’t give up. The fight to stop these abuses or have them investigated, repealed or addressed is not ended by a vote or an election. The decision in November is merely an indicator of how steep the climb to win will be (excruciating or merely grueling). The energy of before the election is nothing compared to what will be needed after, regardless. I would argue that these three things hold true for all Americans. We can’t rage. We can’t despair, and we can’t give up.

Holding our officials accountable has become something not done unless the political class sees a profit in it. Over the past few years a pattern has emerged:

If it: hurts others on your side in the election, you get sacked.

If it: doesn’t seem to matter because it’s not an election year for your side, yawn and move on, nothing to see here.

If it: hurts your opponents even if it’s nothing, there will be one indignant person who gets on camera to give a speech amounting to “Never in my whole life have I been more scandalized and this person should not simply be forced to resign but stand outside on the mall in the rain wearing a sign “I STINK and DESERVE TO BE SPIT UPON BY GOD AND MAN) before being tarred, feathered, audited and thrown in jail indefinitely.”

Then the offending person shall be quietly dismissed with their golden parachute and become part of the speaking head circuit.

If I sound jaded, cynical and agitated, it’s all true. Mostly because I fail at those three things, not wanting to being wrathful, not wanting to despair and not wanting to quit and say “I’ll take my toys and go home.”

We have to fix the home we have. We have to call every senator and every representative and demand they pass a budget, demand they pass budgets every day, don’t let the Congress go home for recess until they fulfill their congressional constitutionally defined duties. Zero out every salary of every elected official and every pension of every elected official until they do their actual job. Pay all of what is lost to the debt. They can live as those who are jobless if they aren’t going to do their job. Every agency that doesn’t file its taxes, every employee that does not file taxes, fired. Fired. Fired. Fired. Every one of them. Every single one.

We ought to call the press and tell them that they need to cover the red and the blue with equal zeal and curiosity rather than pure disdain and absolute adulation based on political affiliation. You want to know why your circulation is dying? Because you only sing to yourselves and congratulate yourselves on how beautiful you sound. Edit and vet yourselves. Be brave enough to speak the truth and document it with facts from reliable sources. Vet your sources better than high school students are currently demanded to do. I know there are exceptions, but they are not the rule.

We ought to cry out at our President and those who aspire to the office, “GROW UP! Do the job! Stop offering what you don’t have and demonizing those who disagree. You’ve burned your last straw man. We are real. Our problems are real and we have real disagreements about how to solve them and we’re not stupid. Stop hyperventilating at each other and demanding we do the same.” If you want the job, you better have a plan and it better be more than it will just take time or wait and see. Despite our constant distractedness, we can follow along. We are a nation of common sense and honor, we deserve better. Our leaders ought to be able to get along with others better than we expect our children to in school. They also ought to be held accountable for failures that aren’t merely gaps in communication or the inability to tell a story or build the narrative. We all know the difference between failing to present a compelling case for a good plan and failing to present a good case period. I would argue, President Obama has proven he doesn’t have a case to prove, and Romney needs to actually present one as a counter.

Failing that, failing us by failing in their duties in favor of a party or in favor of donors or in favor of amassing power, we as the citizens of this country should tell all of you who hold positions we pay for, positions we’ve entrusted you with, positions designated to be honors for leadership, we fire you today. We shall not be part of this experiment anymore. It is failing because you have failed. You have failed us. You have been wretched poor stewards of our past, our present and our posterity. You have failed the future of this country by your votes in the present. Your grades are not incomplete anymore. They are “F’s.”

I still am hopeful that our nation can right itself, that we can grow the economy, bring down the debt and the deficit, improve our existing services and rid a lot of the waste and repeal those laws that threaten the fabric of our nation’s core values. I am hopeful because our country is bigger than either party or any president. But it will become harder as laws and practices that erode our liberties codify and become accepted as simply part of life. (See abortion if you need a perfect example).

At some point, if we do not stop, if we do not demand that our government limit itself, the government shall be all and we shall cease to be a free people. We cannot be free if our every action is now monitored and sanctioned or disapproved. We cannot be free if we must always be “careful” about our thoughts and words. We shall become serfs of the elected. If the government can dictate the limits of our faith, what stops the government from deciding our limits need to be still greater? At what point does the government become a secular caliphate? We the huddled masses yearning to be free will know that our security depends on surrendering not only that freedom, but that yearning. This is not an R or a D problem. It isn’t a case of who started it. It’s a case of WHO WILL STOP IT? Because if no one does, we as a nation will cease to be the great promise to the world we once were and our children will grow up not understanding what they’ve lost.

Linda Burnett, 29 , a resident of San Diego, was visiting her in-laws and while there went to a nearby supermarket to pick up some groceries.

Later, her husband noticed her sitting in her car in the driveway with the windows rolled up and with her eyes closed, with both hands behind the back of her head. He became concerned and walked over to the car.

He noticed that Linda’s eyes were now open and she looked very strange. He asked her if she was okay, and Linda replied that she had been shot in the back of the head and had been holding her brains in for over an hour.

The husband called the paramedics, who broke into the car because the doors were locked and Linda refused to remove her hands from her head. When they finally got in, they found that Linda had a wad of bread dough on the back of her head. A Pillsbury biscuit canister had exploded from the heat, making a loud noise that sounded like a gunshot, and the wad of dough hit her in the back of her head. When she reached back to find out what it was, she felt the dough and thought it was her brains. She initially passed out, but quickly recovered.

Linda is a blonde, a Democrat, and an Obama supporter, but that could all be a coincidence. The defective biscuit canister was analyzed and the expiration date was from 2008, so it was determined to be Bush’s fault.
I’ll take the Mormon over the moron any day.

None that I’m aware of and none given to Nice Deb so I’d say this is just a wrong that must be righted, blogs are a lot of work, heart and sweat and they ought to have their autonomy and not be summarily deleted out of cyberspace with nary a comment

10) Michelle & Valerie say, “Not yet, dont go”
9) Cramming for finals against Romney
8) On George Soros waiting list to see him
7) trying to figure a way of NOT owning Libya
6) upset he has to share intell with Romney
5) doesnt have enough cash to influence pollsters
4) trying to find anything in the house to sell for yard sale
3) hollywood loyalists are NOT returning calls
2) His paid for-take-a-long supporters need a family time out
1) Clint Eastwood wants to speak with him

Because of Obamacare. That’s it. That’s all. Everything else, I can deal with, but the HHS mandate is the straw. It is what made me from a person who follows politics and cares, into an irritated voter. This Tea Partier who up until now felt a bit timid about calling herself as such, is mad.

I am a mother of ten children. I have a master’s in special education. I have worked, loved, thought, read and managed to live these past 46 years without needing Think Progress or any other group to tell me how to think or speak for me. I have read enough of the Health Care law and the subsequent policy fig leaf accommodations to know that I object to this law. It is bad policy.

I am not a puppet of the GOP. I am tired of being dismissed because the media disagrees with my opinion. I am Catholic and I am American. Those are my bonifieds for objecting to this law.

This law does not allow me to be either Catholic or American, since I cannot obey and be in good conscience with my Faith, and I cannot be proud of my civil obligations when they trample on my right to practice my religion. This law upturns my country’s proud heritage of cherishing civil liberties and the freedom of religion from interference by the state, replacing it with a tolerance by the state of my religion’s proclivities. That tolerance is limited and it keeps shrinking. I do not trust the state to protect my right to be Catholic if it is telling me the extent to which I may practice my faith in my life as it pertains to my earning a living.

It is not a war on women to fight against what was not demanded only last month of private employers.

It is not a war on women to insist that one’s faith code not be deliberately narrowed or codified to suit modern sensibilities or liberal policies about abortion, sterilization and birth control.

It is not Republican to denounce this overreach by the government to dictate the parameters of faith as manifested in our public lives through our private businesses and the decisions we make in the process of running them, it is American!

As an American, I denounce this law as a treasonous break of the social compact we were guaranteed by the constitution.

To say this is NOT what the government should be in the business of doing, is not treason or stupidity or miserliness towards the poor or born out of malice towards anyone.

The President should not be setting himself up as the secular pope and using the department of Health and Human Services as his outreach.

We have the right to profess what we believe.

We do not wish to be aiding and abetting in grave moral evil (abortion), or finance unhealthy/risky behavior that warps a woman’s view of her body (her natural body is flawed and must be fixed).

We have been given no say in this matter, we have been simply told by government fiat, to obey. The government is even in the business of granting indulgences to those entities that pay and schmooze up the right allies. It is a corrupt and cynical abuse of the promises this country was founded on, to have the law apply unevenly, and have the law specifically dictate that certain religions must violate their beliefs to comply.

We cannot be Catholic simply by coming to mass every Sunday. It is not worth our time if that is all that Catholic means. We cannot be Catholic if we say we believe these actions to be sinful, but we’ll finance them and turn a blind eye. We will not comply.

I object to this law. I object to this policy. I find it offensive. I object. I respectfully object. I absolutely object. And if the country demands that I choose, between American and Catholic, it is an easy choice. I choose Catholic. But I will be sad, because the America I knew would never make such a demand. It was a better place than this, and it should be again.

You said it Sherry, and very well ! I`m a Dad of only one daughter and Southern Baptist, by birth and then choice, but that`s just the beginning of why I hate ObamaScare. I hate it for your reasons and a plethora of others, starting with the lies and trickery with which it was deemed and reconciled into passage over a holiday weekend. The overall lack of choices we are left with; whether to buy insurance or not and what kind, how much, which coverages and from whom. The costs, the limits, the extra work for medical professionals just to comply, that will force many ins. cos. and Drs. and Nurses and entire clinics and hospitals to leave the biz or seriously curtail services.

The latest composite achievement of the highly sophisticated set who pad their past with moments of victimhood as resume enhancers, is Elizabeth Warren’s claim to be the first woman to breast feed and take the bar in New Jersey. Verification of her lactation litigation feat was not deemed possible. I did not know that being able to nurse a baby was a qualification for elective office, I rather thought sucking from the public teat was the prerequisite. Ergo, the baby is more qualified than she.

However, given that Elizabeth Warren was the Jamie Lynne Grumet on Time Magazine of the law before there was a Jamie Lynne Grumet on Time magazine, I do think we have the makings of a fabulous 50 Something better’s type bar game as a result of her political resume.

Simply look at your own life and craft your own unique victimhood earning bonus points from the constituency for your hardship narrative and claim a senate seat or a stiff shot of your favorite adult beverage as your prize. Warning, first claims out of the bag will be graded on originality and they must meet the strictest credulity standard, they must be lame and unprovable as Warren’s. Plausibility is extra credit.

I’ll start.

I should be considered for a job as CEO of a major bus company in the south because I can back a twelve passenger van down a curvy 1/10th of a mile driveway backwards.

Whoops, that’s provable. I can do that and there are witnesses. This is harder than I thought.

I should be considered as a potential candidate for the Supreme Court because I hear cases every day from 10 different children who all want two things, a ruling in their favor, and lunch.

Again, there is evidence so this won’t work.

How about, I’m a 7th generation Texan…(oops…have documents, how stupid of me)…okay….thinking hard….

How about this….

Because I’ve had ten children, I should be given an honorary medical degree and be allowed to become an OBGYN. Wait, half of that is true.

Because I’ve been married for 22 years, I should be considered an expert on relationships. That’s true too –sorry.

Because I’ve never been drunk, I should be made a Sommelier. Aha! We have a winner…but no one would believe me. So that doesn’t work either.

Because I haven’t bought Facebook Stock, and thus haven’t made anyone lose money, I should get to ring the opening bell. I can’t prove I haven’t lost people money, and I want to ring the opening bell…so that should be sufficient.

Because I haven’t been on a reality television show, I should have one. excepting…that might get me one…ewwwwww.

Your turn. I stink at this drinking game…but maybe it’s because I’ve never been drunk.

One thing Elizabeth Warren has illustrated with her career…it takes dedication to the craft to say such things with a straight face and perfect earnestness if only to gain sympathy. I may need a stiff drink if she’s elected.

Anyone who suffered through our POTUS’ autobiography (now located in the fiction department of your local bookstore) and read about his New York girlfriend now knows that this was more of a composite creation, a merger of multiple women to create the woman in the pages. Now he did acknowledge that some people were composites and the reason he cites is their personal privacy. Indeed. .So private, they can’t be identified. He should give lessons to other agencies that thrive on secrecy. This is how you do it.

Given that she is a composite, one must ask, what is the author trying to say by using this tool? Via Politico:

“In Dreams from My Father, Obama chose to emphasize a racial chasm that unavoidably separated him from the woman he described as his New York girlfriend,” Maraniss writes, offering a passage from the book in which they go to see a play by a black playwright:

One night I took her to see a new play by a black playwright. It was a very angry play, but very funny. Typical black American humor. The audience was mostly black, and everybody was laughing and clapping and hollering like they were in church. After the play was over, my friend started talking about why black people were so angry all the time. I said it was a matter of remembering—nobody asks why Jews remember the Holocaust, I think I said—and she said that’s different, and I said it wasn’t, and she said that anger was just a dead end. We had a big fight, right in front of the theater. When we got back to the car she started crying. She couldn’t be black, she said. She would if she could, but she couldn’t. She could only be herself, and wasn’t that enough.

There is the authenticity of the nature of the arguement with this person. He asserts. She disagrees. He asserts more. End of arguement. Seems like the “I won” approach to things. But she’s also a device to allow him to posit that the anger and the remembering of that anger and note the curious lack of detail. We don’t know the playwrite or the play or the theatre so we can’t know how mainstream or radical this humor that he posits is typical, is. We’re left as always, to fill in the blanks and have to trust the narrator’s opinion and reporting of the things as they were. If this is composite, how are we to know that anything in this landscape is anything but sand, shadows of multiple experiences swirled together to create a POV that advances an agenda? We can’t.

One could ask, how many other fictional but based on real people and events moments are in his tedious self genuflecting tome but that would be fruitless since the press and those in a position to discover the man behind the curtain have shown themselves to suffer from an appauling lack of curiosity. It’s not likely to change much as we might hope.

So I suggest a new title for the book: Never let the truth ruin a good story.

The big question is why is the President admitting to this now? Is it because Jim Treacher and Weazel Zippers and even some at Politico amongst others, have actually read his book and now can begin the rebuttal of the 2008 campaign and its aftermath? (They’re looking for those pesky things called facts). Is this a preemptive attempt to dissarm any future “I ate dog” type scandals between now and the election that would tarnish the glowy Obama is like better than Superman-Jesus-Champaign-and-Caviar-Einstein+awesome awesomeness type image? I suspect not.

This is about elections. How to top the purple prose of the prior cammpaign and reenergize the Obama fainting zombies of the past?

Write and launch a new book…or have someone else do it, with things that weren’t in the first two…how to get people to read it? Admit that some of what was written wasn’t 100% factually are of accurate…not truthfully speaking accurate….and allow the lure of mystery, of getting the intimate details of the real person do the rest. They’ll buy it. And whatever you put in to explain why you didn’t tell the truth in the last two books, they’ll buy that too…because they want this Cool-ade President, who looks great on a cover of Teen Beat…I’m sorry, Newsweek.

Expect more attempts to create an aw shucks type humility it wasn’t all true but hey it’s all in good fun and aren’t I cool and wonderful narrative by the media through November. He will recraft himself and recast himself more times than Lady Gaga and Madonna combined (icky thought) and if he can’t, expect the lapdogs in the press to create in Romney or any other Republican or anyone who would vote Republican as the visual and mental image of evil incarnate worse than Satan times infinity with a dash of pure ignorance to add to the spite. Not only are they evil, they’re stupid and evil. You can’t let them win…

Not far from reality for possible Liberal bumper stickers:

Republicans….Romney….now with 20% more evil for 2012.

or Romney…Elected…the reason the Mayans were right.

Know that we will get hammered over and over again with a double dog dare to prove we’re not racist and that it wasn’t just trying to hang out with the cool kid and make history but that we really BELIEVED…and if we really BELIEVE….then we have to give him a second term. Clap your hands three times and say I do believe taxes promote and create jobs and growth. I do I do I do.

So be prepared.

It is inconceivable to these folks that there are people out there in this land who oppose them on principle and not out of hatred of “the other.” as has been floated in recent newscasts. It’s coming. We shall become a composite of all the left hates, rather than our own selves in the narrative.

Why?

It’s much easier to hate and love composites than real people who are often more than their political affiliation or orientation or racial or economic background. It’s much easier to target and destroy straw men and demagouge your opponents than to wrestle with real flesh and bone arguements and counter proposals. And if we’ve learned anything from our real flesh and bones President and his daydreamy virtual version of himself in print, it’s that whatever else this man is, there is a laziness about his intellect. He expects people to follow though he lead. He expects to win by simply asserting his opinion.

The reaction to the little snip about the President feasting on alternative canine cuisine has been nothing short of cathartic for countless Americans on either side of the political spectrum. For three years, we have suffered from at least half the nation holding its breath and restraining from the least hint of satire or humor against the sitting commander-in-chief for fear of appearing less than reverential to his awesomeness. The other half has been tepid about even making the slightest quip for fear of being labeled ugly things for daring to speak ill of the President.

We cannot function as a democracy if we hold our leaders and officials in too much awe or if we cannot properly gadfly chastise them for their foibles and excesses by pointing them out as foibles and excesses. We simply cannot give the state the fear and awe we owe God, nor should we surrender to the state, that power to deflate the egos with laughter. Freedom of speech must be exercised, and it cannot be properly done if the nation either fears to speak or cannot bring itself to engage in critical thinking for fear of giving comfort to the other side of the political aisle.

Fortunately, we have bloggers and alternative media and Mark Steyn and Rush and others who are only too willing to sharpen their wits on this subject, but the dog controversy allowed the common plebeian to engage in some time-honored quips against the POTUS, both healthy and good for the electorate to remember that it can do.

Twitchy has been collecting the best bon mots and Jim Treacher lead the charge to note the disconnect. But I want to consider the more important revelation of this little bit from the President’s biography. Why is it important now? Because we are in an election year and the story is not that the President ate dog, but that the President ate dog, talked about it in his biography which he touted and promoted and which the media used to sculpt a narrative about him leading up to the 2008 elections and which they hope to repackage now. Unfortunately, 3 1/2 years of the nation going out with the man on what started as blind dates has lead to some folks actually reading and digesting both what he has said and what he has done and discovering….they more they know this President, the better they like their dogs….and not in a gastronomical sense.

I don’t care that the President ate dog. I care that the press are his lap-dogs still. They might not care that he ate dog either, but they might be a bit more circumspect about being his lap pets now that they know what could happen if they get out of line.

I don’t care that the President ate dog. I do care that he’s spent 5 Trillion dollars in 3 1/2 years, which may mean the government has to start taxing us in dog years to meet its obligations.

I don’t care that the President consumed dog. I do care that we still have an unemployment rate of over 8.2 and that’s with all the hard and soft numbers manipulated to put the best spin on it. Saying that it would have been worse if we hadn’t spent 5 Trillion….that dog won’t hunt.

I don’t care that the President ate dog, is eating dog or will eat dog. What he eats is irrelevant. I do care that he spends a lot of my collected tax money letting his wife lecture me on what I should feed my children. To me, that type of chutzpah should earn him a night in the dog house.

The President’s past repasts hold no bearing on my opinion of his poor management of our country, our resources, the enforcement of our laws, promotion and protection of our principles or stewardship of our liberties and traditions and sacred institutions. He could eat fluffy bunnies and baby seals and it wouldn’t change my opinion. He dogged doing his job if his job was to improve the economy, increase our security and safeguard and cherish our nation and its values at home and abroad. He and his wife hot dogged on our dime for three and a half years with nary a peep from the media about any of their perpetual indulgences, both lavish and absurd. He treated any opposition as though they had drowned puppies for voicing even the most modest of proposals that ran counter to his opinion of what should be done. To the American people, he said “Heel.” To those who object to paying higher taxes on an ever decreasing return of liberties protected and worth while services provided, “Let them eat dog food.” To the millions of faithful Catholics, he put us in the dog house with a leash and said, “Sit. Stay. Roll Over. Play dead.” while I spay and neuter your religious institutions and teachings to suit my agenda.

So I welcome the mockery, the jokes and the willingness to even begin to notice that this is merely a man. I hope the trend continues. Cry Havok and let slip the dogs of politics!

Lastly, let me say, again, I do not care that he ate the dog. It does not bear weight. It is nothing. What I do care about is our country. What I do hope is that the American people are sobering up on the hair of the dog that bit them, or rather, the aires of the man that bit dog, and they’re discovering, they don’t much like the taste left in their mouths.

Don’t think we need to use Alinsky tactics, think we just need to be willing to speak truth, use grace and humor and point out those pesky things called facts. I don’t want a society that is dedicated to scorched earth dialogues or rather diatribes. We simply need to be honest and open and willing to use our own wit and knowledge and not buy into the hype or partisan labels that are used to paint those who oppose us as either the enemy or the devil. We’re all Americans. This is a battle of ideals and ideas and if we cannot win without becoming like that which we rightly and justly find objectionable, then we have already lost.

For those irony impaired, yesterday Rush Limbaugh poked fun at the utter farce that our society has become.

After Georgetown law student and “reproductive rights activist” Sandra Fluke — told sympathetic policy-makers that the administration’s so-called contraception mandate should stand … because her peers are going broke buying birth control, Rush suggested that if women were going to demand that they be provided free birth control for their sexual appetites, that the payers ought to get something in return. After all, demanding money for sex is an old profession. It was brutal satire of what was an absurd proposal.

Quoting Rush:

“So, Ms. Fluke, and the rest of you Femi-Nazis, here’s the deal: If we are going to pay for your contraceptives and, thus, pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. And I’ll tell you what it is. We want you to post the videos online so we can all watch.”

The media promptly went insane. According to NBC’s William’s on last night’s news, women were outraged at Rush’s cruel painting of this poor defenseless law student as a prostitute.

Mind you, a grown woman testifying before Congress that she wants them to force institutions that don’t believe in contraception to pay for her and anyone else like her to be able to have seemingly consequence free sex as often as she and anyone else who wants to likes, is NOT outrageous. Is NOT shameful. Is not something which should give anyone serious pause.

But suggesting that instead of simply being cheap (morally and fiscally), she ought to “put out” something in return for goodies she demands? THIS tarnishes her reputation? The twitterverse exploded. “How shameful!” Yes. I agree, how awful to women. I feel faint. Heavens to Betsy!…What vulgarity! My poor ears. They’ve been befouled. I need smelling salts. How is a woman who can’t manage her affairs (sexually or fiscally) an empowered feminist? She’s still demanding someone pay for her, take care of her. She’s still a kept woman, or alternatively if that is too harsh, she’s about as emancipated as a confirmed spinster in a knitting bee.

Memo to all of you moonbat women out there: Don’t want to be referred to as anything but a lady? Act like nothing other than one.

This is a woman who very carefully chose Georgetown. She knew exactly what she was doing when she filled out her applications. If she got into Georgetown she more than likely could have gotten into a number of other law schools that are just as good that did provide birth control with their insurance.

What truly amazes me is that they think we don’t have the intelligence to see through there false claims. $1,000 per year for birth control? Even CBS looked into what it cost in the DC area and can’t come up with a scenario that it would cost that much.

And didn’t we just learn a few weeks ago that Planned Parenthood will pass out birth control like pez candy to anyone who needs it? What, she’s smart enough to go to Georgetown but not smart enough to Google Cheap Birth Control?

I understand that she is standing up for something she believes in. I don’t agree with it, but I admire people standing up. But how is doing her cause any good when it takes less than a minute to blow her claims to bits?

Let us imagine some time in the future, some ultra wing nut job comes into the Executive Office, and that person decides that for the good of the general welfare, all citizens should be given free guns. That way, all of them are armed. All of them can protect themselves. All of them have the capacity to be safe in the event they need to protect themselves.

There would be large groups of people who would object on moral grounds, wanting precautions or background checks or citing safety issues, arguing that states already have standards and procedures in place that this regulation trumps. But the Federal branch is firm. Further, the Executive branch then decides to distribute them to each citizen free of charge so they can use them as they see fit. Regardless of any current existing laws, any moral objections by those who think firearms are dangerous and without any qualms about those who think perhaps children should not have access to such things, the government explains that this will result ultimately in a safer society. It is for the public good.

When people object to their taxes paying for such things, the administration will explain, you aren’t paying for guns, you are paying the distributors for making sure everyone has a gun. We are paying the manufacturers so you aren’t morally culpable for any accidental killings or intentional ones, you aren’t buying the guns, you’re just funding the government. Your moral responsiblity ends where the Government says it does.

Not to worry. Soothe soothe soothe. Feel better? If you don’t want to own a gun, don’t avail yourself of the free one, or don’t use it. Your government says it’s okay ergo, it’s okay.

When you still object, the government tells you, it’s a done deal and your opinion is irrelevant.

This imaginary tale is to remind people who cheer this current HHS mandate and pretend it isn’t a massive expansion of federal government that seeds the pockets of Planned Parenthood, that the method and the motive are tyranny, even if you personally don’t think the policy is immoral.

I happen to think it is a direct threat to religious liberty and an attempt to eliminate the Catholic church as a moral voice in the United States, to replace all religion and charity with government, to make all religions mirror the secular puritanism that is the state, because the secular religion cannot tollerate dissent. I have no illusions that if this HHS mandate stands, we will be fully funding abortions in all circumstances via our insurance riders within a few years. The line is here.

Agreed. As I have said a million times, the Left wins when they get to start the argument where they want and they certainly have won this one by making sure everybody understands a woman’s reproductive “right.” From that position, they can argue, in a secular manner, almost anything to do with abortion, late term abortion and contraceptives. Had the NRA been able to apply its will to gun possession at the same intensity and success, your scenario would be fact instead of well played fun.

Which really makes me mad, but I sure would like Obama to be forced to buy me another gun!

You are correct, as I posted over at P&P, “witnessing faith” is often as simple as saying “wrong is wrong” and be done with it. Sadly, in our country, the government has long since won the argument that it knows best. And people, even religious people, tend to be sheep. There are only two ways out of this, that is to submit or revolt, because the Left isn’t going to give up and go away. Tom Jefferson would have long ago asked this question. “What in the heck are you people waiting for?”

I did a long post at my site concerning who the LEFT is. So long I think the website revolted during the editing process. So I put it up as it was mostly. Take a look. It is extensive. Also, take the time to read my book. I predicted this moment way back in 1996.

If you don’t know by now, the HHS has mandated free birthcontrol for everyone. It used to be a chicken in every pot, now it’s a pillbox for every uterus. We will occupy Wallstreet but by golly, those squatters in the womb have to go!

And if you object, well, you have a year to get used to it.

365 days to pray for an alternative. To lobby the deaf ears of Congress. To file law suits and spend time, talent, treasure and passion railing against a Leviathan government that has decided everyone must get with the times and those practices while personally are just fine, shouldn’t be applied to one’s livelyhood or way of life. Finance abortion on demand. Don’t want abortion. Don’t get one. But pay for the next person who does. Don’t want birth control? Don’t use it. But pay for it anyway. Moral objections? Pshaw. That’s so 19th century of you troglodite!

With all due respect, it’s been a good run. America with it’s experiment with liberty and limited government is now over. We shall be taxed for everything and anything. We shall be made to pay for anything. The government shall tell us how we may practice our religion, with any tenets we hold dear being checked as soon as we leave the chapel door. You can believe what you want still, as long as you don’t actually practice it or state it publically.

We shall pay for things we do not want, for things for other people to engage in that we do not approve of, and for all things Congress deems necessary, which is to say everything. There is no limit. No budget. No plans of debt reduction. There is no brake on the wants, wishes/desires for more of our government, no activity they won’t regulate, no area of life on which they do not have the final say. They are the authority, the experts, the ones with the power. We should be gracious for the time, money, indeed the jobs we have. We should be grateful our betters have been willing to spend such time educating us, making laws to get us in line, to make our lives into the utopian visions they hold for us. Everything will be so much better if we just agree to go along. Can’t we all just get along? If you can’t get along with us, it must be because you are evil, ignorant and like making things unfair. Now…you aren’t like that are you? Because if you are, you need to be educated, changed or silenced. Cue Sopa.

It’s clear with the complicity of the media, that we have no say. We cannot make enough noise. Any protest we muster shall be deemed dangerous, treasonous, evil. Is it time to take our toys and go home and remember that we had a beautiful country once, with beautiful laws and people committed to the rule of law and the Constitution? Whatever we are, it is not what it was. I don’t know what it is, but I don’t like it. I didn’t vote for it. I don’t want to finance it. I disagree with it. Is it time to consider whether in the course of human events, the tree of freedom needs watering? I’m not sure…but I am fearful…this does not feel like the home of the free.

Let me be clear, folks are telling you that Cinderella`s Castle just looks smaller than me because of this perspective thing, that it`s an optical illusion. I`m here to tell you that I AM bigger than that castle !

Because we didn’t read the bill before we passed it, the Stimulus bill of 2009 Surprize! has an easter egg that stinks to high heaven. Kudos to the Missouried Education Watchdog for doing the leg work, and it deserves more press than it’s getting.

Living just outside the beltway, I don’t recall a firestorm of criticism about creating a national database, defacto or otherwise of student information, and I listen to conservative sources of information that are local. So I’m thinking, this needs more noise, more pressure, more concern. We’re going to be told in soothing tones, nothing to see here, move along. But information is power. Having access to information without our consent or knowledge, is dangerous power.

Go read it.

Then start brainstorming, how do we deconstruct the Leviathan that has become our government, where rules are written and rewritten silently to eliminate privacy, to eliminate our liberty, to allow others who do not love us, to know more than in some cases, those who do love us, know.

Medical records too, after one has paid for them, now belong to the doctor, to do with as he pleases and can be sold or used to insure and to not insure as the corporations decides. Hereditary diseases among others can now be determined for many generations and may be used to discriminate against an innocent individual in hiring and education and who may live and who may die according to the state, Obamacare, with its nationalization of healthcare, must absolutely have this degrading, condescending violation of another human being ‘s sovereign personhood and informed consent in the fine print. As Pelosi said: “Hurry up and pass it so we can learn what is in it.” Believe me, Obama is no Santa Clause. Obama will suck the life out of us, in the same way as he approves of the brains of the unborn being sucked out. Obama is no Big Brother, Obama is the devil in disguise. Congress makes laws and legislates the will of the people. Obama is a usurper and imposter, alien and traitor

IP initials for Intellectual Property, is being raped from citizens without our congressional representatives being and having informed consent to speak for us and for themselves. Business as usual for Congress does not include raping information or transffering stolen intellectual property to Obama. “Lets pass it to find out what is in it” says Pelosi. The citizens have been swindled through Congress by our government. Hillary Clinton put in her healthcare package a two year federal prison sentence for any doctor who dared to medically assist any person not in his assigned group. Does anybody really believe that Obamacare is less punitive? Having not been given the time to read the fine print and denied informed consent, persons are just like a fourteen year old pregnant girl forced into an abortion and being driven to an abortion clinic by the public school nurse and across state lines. The same public school nurse who handed the infant child the ineffective condom . It is the duty of the state to protect its citizens’ virginity, innocence, civil rights to privacy and intellectual property.This would be done through informed consent and representative government, otherwise it is piracy.

Because making resolutions for other people is so much easier and more satisfying than doing it for one’s self, this year I’m proposing the following for our existing Congress, Executive Branch and General Public. It’s the very least I can do.
10) Bo will switch from gourmet IAMS Premium to Generic dog food as a symbolic gesture of solidarity with those in the 99%, animals who do not occupy the White House.

9) Because the economy is still down and spending public money carelessly or extravagantly would be unseemly and project an image that our President and First Lady are out of touch, State Dinners now to be the small buffet (one trip only) at Sizzlers…before five.

8) All Campaign Fund Raisers will be 50/50, with half going towards the treasury. After all, none of the politicians want to be unduly influenced by dirty money from lobbyists, fat cats, corporations or rich famous people who want access.

7) Any person who says, “Raise My Taxes” will immediately be hit up for a donation of 10% of their bank account, not income, current existing money. Any person who says, “Raise Their Taxes” will be immediately hit up with a 5% increase tax on all expenditures to remind them that nothing happens in a vacuum.

6) A fee on all politicians, 5$ for each untruth/slander/distortion uttered. Pro: if they continue as normal, the debt will be erased within the political year. Bonus Pro: if they wise up, we won’t have to hear their bloviating.

5) Hypocrisy Oath: A new demand of all elected officials…to act as they preach, or be forced to wear a scarlet “H” and hold a sign, “I”m annoying and sanctimonious and you pay me.”

4) Hollywood Documentation: They can tell us how important their thoughts are only after they release all their transcripts, SAT scores and can beat Sarah Palin in a debate to be shown on Pay Per View. Losers take a vow of a year of silence.

3) All recipients of stimulus money must document jobs created and/or saved. Doormen for the revolving access to the Whitehouse for political donations do not count.

2) Press will cease pretending they are anything but cheerleaders and carry pom poms to all future political events and do jack knives when the politicians speak so that no one is unclear who they’re rooting for.

1) If you ask for 1.3 Trillion more, you have to show all your work to get credit for the math. No more imaginary numbers, only absolute and real ones.

You have been thinking about this for some time, right ? Good job ! May I add just one more ?

11) Any actor who screams s/he will move out of the country if “X” gets elected will have to show documentation that Two Men and a Truck and a global moving service have received a non-refundable booking fee !

2) have never committed a single sin or had a single infraction that might have resulted in legal proceedings.

3) not smoke, drink, have been divorced, have converted to any religion other than athiesm, or held an office that is from a red or southern state

4) never hold a position that is consistent with their religious beliefs and publically state it as such.

5) never make any money or have inherrited it or have married into it.

6) have never held a political office in which they attempted to follow their political leanings.

7) not make negative campaign ads.

8) not receive money from anyone the left dislikes.

9) absolutely never be pro-life in any circumstance.

10) not want to lower taxes.

11) not disagree with democrats on any subject.

12) not have anyone agree with them if they fail to follow step 11.

13) not refuse to let their children or wife be examined with a fine tooth comb, microscope and be destroyed, mocked, belittled and threatened.

14) not dare to speak against existing regime or democrats or mock their ideas.

15) never decide to run.

Just so we’re clear. No candidate with an “R” need even apply. If you do, we might consider that we don’t really need elections because the right sort of people might not win and then the Utopia that is just around the corner if we pass every policy, wouldn’t happen.

Tune in next week when we consider the time honored question: Republicans: Dead or Extinct? Which does the Liberal Media prefer?